Posted on 10/25/2017 4:17:55 PM PDT by Hojczyk
As a result, 88% of the $1.8 trillion cost of this tax break goes to the 10% of families with incomes above $100,000.
In other words, this is one hugely regressive tax break.
And since the GOP plan would nearly double the standard deduction, the cost of getting rid of the SALT tax break will be even more concentrated among upper-income families.
So why are Democrats so intent on keeping it?
To understand that, you also have to understand that the benefits of the SALT deduction are heavily skewed toward wealthy high-tax states, for the simple reason that the more someone pays in state and local taxes, the more they can deduct from federal income taxes.
In fact, just seven states — California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York — account for more than half the deduction's cost, according to the Heritage Foundation. California alone is responsible for almost 20%.
Not only are these high-tax states, but they all just happen to be heavily Democratic. (Hillary Clinton had an average 21.6-point margin of victory in these seven states.)
In effect, then, the SALT tax break has turned into a massive federal subsidy of profligate liberal states, paid for by fiscally conservative states.
That's why Democrats are so determined to keep it. Not because they care about working class families, but because they don't want to see their rich friends who live in deep-blue states get hurt.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Trump should TWEET Daily about this. Please do it.
Make every tweet count.
Get the message out the only way he can~!!!!
ASAP.
“California alone is responsible for almost 20%.”
Texas is the 3rd highest recipient, net, of all the states and they are held up as “low tax and fiscally responsible”.
South Carolina is the highest recipient, per capita.
Texas receives about $1.50 for every dollar of income tax collected there.
South Carolina receives $8! for every dollar of income tax collected there.
CA, NY and Il are net donor states...paying more in income tax than they receive back.
Who subsidizes whom?
The ignorance and class warfare on Free Republic is astounding. There was a time when it was not tolerated.
Now we have piles of fools who are eager to “soak the rich”...you know, legitimately middle class earners.
Shame on you scumbags.
Such simplistic $/state numbers simply don’t tell the full story, and painting this as “soak the rich” is either ignorant or disingenuous.
A small state such as SC has an outsized effect from their large military presence. Similarly, Dem policies for the last 50 years have led to their being a large welfare-consuming state. Both of these tend to make them net recipients of Federal spending, on a statewide basis.
Presenting this as CA subsidizing SC, as if SC is somehow irresponsible, is patently absurd.
Simple measures such as net Federal inflow/outflow are nearly useless for anything other than demagoguery.
“Simple measures such as net Federal inflow/outflow are nearly useless for anything other than demagoguery.”
At base that’s why so many support eliminating the SALT deductions. It’s why they support removing SALT, so they “can quit subsidizing California”.
And it IS all about “soaking the rich”. Anyone who claims otherwise is not paying attention. I understand you’re valiantly trying to paint a different picture, but those who a considering deeply see it for what it is.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.